SANGITA KAMILYA,J S MARKET, DHENKANAL V. ITO, WARD, DHENKANAL

ITA 84/CTK/2026

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Smt Sangita Kamilya against the order of the ld. CIT(A), Cuttack, which was dismissed ex-parte due to non-appearance and non-submission of required details by the assessee. The appeal was initially barred by 2106 days, but the delay was condoned based on a petition supported by an affidavit, which was not found to be false. The Tribunal considered the submissions of both parties and decided to restore the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment, emphasizing the need for the assessee to cooperate fully in the proceedings. The imposition of costs was justified due to the assessee's previous non-cooperation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 841185 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 27-01-2026
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.84/CTK/2026 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Smt Sangita Kamilya, Prop. Kalinga Jewellery, J.S.Market, Dhenkanal- 759001 PAN No.ADKPK 5184 E Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward, Dhenkanal Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee represented by Shri Syed Bakiullkah, A.R. Department represented by Shri Sanjib Banerjee, Sr.DR Date of hearing 26/02/2026 Date of pronouncement 26/02/2026 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), Cuttack in Appeal No.0517/2016-17 dated 21/01/2020 for the A.Y. 2013-14. 2. Shri Syed Bakiullah, ld. A.R. appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Sanjib Banerjee, ld. Sr.DR represented on behalf of the revenue. 3. At the outset, it is found that the appeal of the assessee is barred by 2106 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed condonation petition supported by affidavit stating the sufficient reasons for condonation of delay, which are not found to be false. Ld.Sr. DR also did not raise any serious objection to condone the delay. Accordingly, the delay of 2106 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 84/Ctk/2026 2 4. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte due to non-appearance and non-submission of various details. It was the submission that complete details were also not furnished before the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of the jurisdictional AO to decide the issue afresh so that the assessee could be able to produce all the evidences to substantiate its claim. 5. In reply, ld Sr.DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that if the issue is to be restored to the file of ld.AO, then a cost should be imposed. 6. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(A) clearly shows that the appellate order has been passed exparte due to non-submissions of the required details by the assessee. Even the assessee has not appeared before him to substantiate the grounds of appeal. It was the submission of ld AR that complete details were not furnished before the AO. This being so, in the interest of justice, we restore the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. jurisdictional AO for denovo assessment after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. However, looking to the non-cooperation of the assessee during the course of appellate proceedings even after issuance of notices to the assessee by the ld. CIT(A), we impose a cost of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees five Thousand only) on the assessee, as admitted by the ld. A.R. of the assessee, to be payable to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bar Association, Sector-1, CDA, Cuttack-753014, within sixty days from the date Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 84/Ctk/2026 3 of this order and receipt of the same would be produced before the AO at the first hearing. Should the assessee not pay the above-mentioned costs within the prescribed period of sixty days from the date of this order, the order of the ld. CIT(A) shall stand confirmed. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 26/02/2026. Sd/- sd/- (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack, Dated: 26/02/2026 *Ranjan, Sr. PS Copy to: 1. Assessee - Smt Sangita Kamilya, Prop. Kalinga Jewellery, J.S.Market, Dhenkanal-759001 2. Revenue- I.T.O, Ward, Dhenkanal 3. CIT(A), Cuttack 4. CIT 5. DR 6. Guard File By Order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Cuttack Printed from counselvise.com "